On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:24:37PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 03:13:19PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 01:08:43PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:57:21AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > > > > 1/ Turns out GNU libtool simply *removes* stuff it doesn't understand > > > > while > > > > linking. > > > > > > I find that no more buggy than GCC passing all unknown junk to ld... > > > > > > Joerg > > > > Is that a joke ? > > > > 'cause I can't tell. > > Nope, I'm pretty serious. Sure enough, either behavior sucks...
You should get your priorities straight ! occasionnally, gcc behavior can be a bit annoying, but it's never ever a silent bug ! I've found at least one instance where libtool ignores some mispelled option entirely.. What do you think of a link line that would read libtool --mode=link cc -o a --hey-im-dog --and-i-have-no-fucking-idea-what-im-doing a.lo guess what ? that *will work with gnu libtool* because it just fucking completely discards what it doesn't understand. That's fucking dangerous ! it means that, if you have an option that helps you making better executable, like say a -fstack-protector like option that would run during linking, you can't just say CC='cc -fmy-magic-option' and hope that libtool link will actually use it. That's totally sick and completely stupid. there's no way in hell we're going to emulate such wacky bogus insecure behavior !
